ArticleJournal of veterinary internal medicine2026
Evaluation of a subcutaneous continuous glucose monitoring system in critically ill neonatal foals.
Article in Journal of veterinary internal medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDysglycemia is common in critically ill neonatal foals. Continuous glucose monitoring systems (CGMS) are potentially useful in these cases, but factors such as poor peripheral perfusion could interfere with results. HYPOTHESIS/
objectivesEvaluate the correlation, agreement, and accuracy of CGMS compared to point-of-care glucometry (POCG) and laboratory analysis (LAB) in critically ill neonatal foals and assess the impact of hypotension on CGMS measurements. ANIMALS: Fifteen critically ill, client-owned neonatal foals.
methodsIn a prospective method comparison study utilizing clinical cases, glucose concentration was measured serially using CGMS and POCG (every 6 h), and LAB (every 24 h) for pairwise comparison. Blood pressure was measured every 12 h.
resultsAverage bias (95% limits of agreement) between CGMS and LAB, POCG and LAB, and CGMS and POCG were 48 mg/dL (-27 to 111), 10 mg/dL (-23 to 45), and 38 mg/dL (-21 to 98), respectively. Spearman's correlation was significant between CGMS and LAB (r = 0.65), POCG and LAB (r = 0.77), and CGMS and POCG (r = 0.75). The CGMS accuracy was low with only 15.5% of CGMS concentrations within 15% of LAB concentrations, compared with 88.3% for POCG. Hypotension did not affect CGMS measurements. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: The CGMS provided glucose measurements above both LAB and POCG concentrations. Given its low correlation and accuracy, CGMS cannot replace LAB or POCG as the sole glucose measurement method in critically ill foals. However, it is a useful adjunct for tracking trends and providing alerts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.